Mailwatch(ed) Forum

Tubby Isaacs wrote: ↑Mon Jun 28, 2021 5:49 pm The proper online left have are on the case. Kim Leadbetter is a Tory because she thinks recurring spending should generally be funded from tax and fees, rather than just borrowed forever.

I dunno, Aaron. Maybe all the governments in the world are missing this easy MMT/ "na na na debt" approach of yours. Perhaps Bangladesh could have a British NHS if it sacked all the neoliberal squares in the finance ministry.

Yeah I saw that just more bad faith criticism from Aaron.

Don't know if it's bad faith or he's just stupid.

Galloway seems to have been responding to a fake photo up there from that poster. Still not sure what this has got to do with the Police though.

If you want see some real bad faith check out this video from Politics Joe.



1. Oli Dugmore can't pronounce Kim's surname.

2. They hung around her like creeps trying to intimadate her.

3. Shakeel Afsar whom they call an anti-LGBT activist personally i prefer to call him a bigot.

4. They blatently ignore the part when Afsar shouts vote for him do not vote for Labour whilst pointing at Galloway.

5. They then ask Galloway softball questions.

I mean, even if you thought Galloway had been unfairly maligned here, is that really the big issue?

Why would anyone associate Galloway with this ranting queerbasher? It's totally unfair.

Tubby Isaacs wrote: ↑Mon Jun 28, 2021 5:49 pm The proper online left have are on the case. Kim Leadbetter is a Tory because she thinks recurring spending should generally be funded from tax and fees, rather than just borrowed forever.

I dunno, Aaron. Maybe all the governments in the world are missing this easy MMT/ "na na na debt" approach of yours. Perhaps Bangladesh could have a British NHS if it sacked all the neoliberal squares in the finance ministry.

Even if you could just print or borrow away the public sector wage bill with no consequences, best not to mention it to voters. They’ll think you’re daft as a brush.

Somebody on the Guardian has told me that it's education, which makes us richer, so it's OK. As my old teacher used to say, "Write that on the top of your GCSE paper and see how many marks you get".

Galloway and Williamson have become the political equivalent of actors who played a small role in a sci-fi/fantasy film who then spend the rest of their careers at ever smaller and crapper conventions playing for ever more hardcore fans. Only instead of catchphrases and signing dvds while pretending they’re still waiting for that big career break and this is just filling time, they just have to go more and more extreme and contort themselves ever more ridiculously to avoid having to face the fact they’re now cranks.

Galloway isn't waiting for a big role- this is the big role now, causing a stink in by elections.

There's a chance there could be a by-election in Poplar and Limehouse if Aspana Begum is convicted. Whether he'd show up there or not, I don't know. He won't win it.

Some amusement below the line on that Bastani thing.

Youngian wrote: ↑Mon Jun 28, 2021 9:01 pm
Even if you could just print or borrow away the public sector wage bill with no consequences, best not to mention it to voters. They’ll think you’re daft as a brush.

This guy reckons it could be a winning slogan.

One of McDonnell's wise men shows up in an effort of stopping this nonsense. Big Simon has a few pops before he loses the will to live.

One thing I do give credit to the previous Labour regime is that they didn't disappear down this rabbit hole. There's a fair amount of this about, and it could easy have got a significant hold. McDonnell got experts in early on and went with mainstream Keynsian macro.

Tubby Isaacs wrote: ↑Mon Jun 28, 2021 8:51 pm I mean, even if you thought Galloway had been unfairly maligned here, is that really the big issue?

Why would anyone associate Galloway with this ranting queerbasher? It's totally unfair.

Not to mention that in the video Shakeel Afsar (the activist in question) is seen shouting Vote for anyone but Labour, vote for him whilst pointing at Galloway.

Perhaps it is merely expectation management, but the Guardian are reporting that some Labour figures are now putting their chances of retaining the seat as low as five per cent.

With any luck, Burgon or Butler will trigger another leadership challenge and get their arses handed back to them even more emphatically than last time.

Butler has said already she won't.

The Times is running that Angela Rayner already has the nominations for a leadership challenge, Angela Rayner has denied all knowledge of this on Twitter.

I suspect the Times is being mischievous.

Hopefully Boris’s recent callousness and Hancock’s shenanigans will have both dented the Tories and made some people think more about what exactly a vote for Galloway really costs.

Crabcakes wrote: ↑Thu Jul 01, 2021 7:53 am

Hopefully Boris’s recent callousness and Hancock’s shenanigans will have both dented the Tories and made some people think more about what exactly a vote for Galloway really costs.

I doubt it. Never underestimate the inGurLiSh pubLikes capacity for stupid.

Crabcakes wrote: ↑Thu Jul 01, 2021 7:53 am I suspect the Times is being mischievous.

Hopefully Boris’s recent callousness and Hancock’s shenanigans will have both dented the Tories and made some people think more about what exactly a vote for Galloway really costs.

Saw that. No attributable quotes, just lots of public domain general facts (a by-election loss will be bad etc) and what-ifs.

Crabcakes wrote: ↑Thu Jul 01, 2021 7:53 am I suspect the Times is being mischievous.

Hopefully Boris’s recent callousness and Hancock’s shenanigans will have both dented the Tories and made some people think more about what exactly a vote for Galloway really costs.

One key thing to note from that survation poll is that they're a lot of undecided voters.

Labour camp are sounding confident and bookies have slashed the odds on a Labour win. Hancock debacle?